Storkian

Let's discuss. --• Storkian • 23:51, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments

Feel free to write comments here.

---

Testing 1 2 3

--Storkian aka iSoroush ^Talk 00:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)--Storkian aka iSoroush ^Talk 00:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)--Storkian aka iSoroush ^Talk 00:15, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject StarCraft

What is this? - Mtmelendez ^(Talk) 11:36, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright. My original message to you was to ask what the project is about, and what is its status? Why did you ask other users not to edit? - Mtmelendez ^(Talk) 13:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Warning! Your signature has a mistake. It appears that your talk page link in your signature actually links to another user which is blocked, User:Melsaran. I suggest you correct this as soon as possible, and to fix your previous signatures in other pages to avoid confusion. Others might think you're a sockpuppet of Melsaran and block you too. Thanks. - Mtmelendez ^(Talk) 13:19, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

{{StarCraft-stub}}

Hi - I see you have recently created one or more new stub types. As it states at Wikipedia:Stub, at the top of most stub categories, and in many other places on Wikipedia, it is recommended that new stub types are proposed prior to creation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Stub sorting/Proposals, in order to check whether the new stub type is already covered by existing stub types, whether it is named according to stub naming guidelines, whether it is otherwise correctly formatted, whether it reaches the standard threshold for creation of a new stub type, and whether it crosses existing stub type hierarchies. Your new stub type is currently listed at WP:WSS/D - please feel free to make any comments there as to any rationale for this stub type. And please, in future, consider proposing new stub types first! Grutness...wha? 00:56, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Starcraft WikiProject

I'll do what I can. - Mtmelendez ^(Talk) 21:36, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

SC Wikiproject concerns

As probably the most active SC editor going at the moment, I have to say I think a dedicated SC wikiproject really isn't necessary. SC is not as broad a subject as other games such as the Final Fantasy series or even the Warcraft series. We can get all the support we need from the VG Wikiproject, which is far better suited for the tasks at hand. I also have fears that it will "invade" (for want of a better phrase) on the plans that myself and a number of other editors have established for getting SC articles up to spec with WP:FICTION: namely creation of a Species of StarCraft and a Locations of StarCraft (both of which are currently in my sandbox, currently prioritising the development of the species article).

In any case, it would have been far more useful - and prudent - to put the creation of a Wikiproject to discussion on Talk:StarCraft before creating it without any visible discussion or consensus. However, if this project could perhaps be geared towards sorting out the mediums involved first (ie the games and novels), it would give myself and the other editors chance to finish our rewrites and get the universe aspects completed and tested - there's no way they are simply being thrown out the window because a Wikiproject suddenly turns up, not after having put the last six months into them.

However, I'll give the project my support if it gets off the ground. As I said, it could help with getting the mediums going properly. I've put a more detailed comment on the project talkpage. -- Sabre (talk) 11:10, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Thaks for the invitation. I used to be a big StarCraft contributor here. However, I've moved on to the StarCraft wiki and am one of the contributors. I don't think I'll have much time to contribute to both wikis. Sorry. Kimera757 (talk) 23:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Get to grips with policy

Firstly, your comments on the Zerg page are completely ignorant with Wikipedia policy. This is not the StarCraft Wiki, we deal with the aspects of the game encyclopedically, not like a fan site. Merging the three species in together is in fact encouraged by WP:FICTION, and is nothing like merging three real-life articles together. Humans, apples and snakes are all real things, whilst the Protoss, Zerg and Terrans are aspects of the same game series: ie, the three playable sides. Differences in physiology are entirely irrelevant to the notability of the fictional concepts of the species in StarCraft, development information, reception, cultural impact and merchandise all define notability and the species of StarCraft are all tied together by these and can therefore be merged into a single article. As substantial notable material relating to any particular species is not available, it is even more necessary to merge. In fact, merging the species is exactly what myself and my fellow editor are doing, per WP:FICTION. This is not a fansite, or a collection or fan-inspired facts like SC Wiki. This is an encyclopedia - it has specific criteria for inclusion. Plus, the comment was made a long time ago, back as far as at least 2005.

Secondly, your comments on the List of StarCraft locations page was entirely unnecessary, completely unrelated and six months late. The discussion there was merging the old article on Zerus into the locations article, not about merging the locations article anywhere. Whilst that current version needs a full overhaul, it is not going to be merged into the absolute mess that is StarCraft universe, which should ideally be deleted, not have more in-universe details merged into it. And again, this is not SC Wiki, and Wikipedia has no relation whatsoever to SC Wiki. We do not dictate what information we include on Wikipedia based on what a fan-run site based on the same software has on the same subject, we dictate it on basis of notability, and the planned rehaul of the locations articles will include such notability: namely the development of maps and terrain graphics of the game, and the reception of that aspect of the game. There are plans to redo the SC universe article, moving it to StarCraft series and making it akin to Halo series, thereby stripping out all of the irrelevant in-universe detail already contained in it.

Thirdly, putting templates across all the talk pages of the StarCraft articles practically amounts to advertising as the project is still under construction and has not even got off the ground. I'm therefore removing those templates, but they can be restored if and when the SC wikiproject manages to get going.

Fourthly, your comments on the Zergling deletion page were also ignorant of policy. The unit articles were all deleted legitimately as they are not notable in that level of detail, and those articles fell foul of WP:FICTION and WP:NOT#GUIDE and as such were regarded unencyclopedic.

Familiarise yourself with the policies of Wikipedia: you need to raise your game and realise that SC is not as significant to the rest of the world than you may have originally thought, and also that you can't cover fiction encyclopedically by treating things in it as though they were real. If you can't do that, then StarCraft Wiki would be a far more fitting place for your contributions. I apologise if this seems like a rant towards you, but it is necessary to get you to realise what Wikipedia is and is not.

-- Sabre (talk) 16:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is NOT a democracy. And I never said StarCraft was not significant, but you have to rate these things up: [WP:NOTABILITY|this is the whole notability issue]]. If it isn't notable through reliable, secondary sources with significant coverage, it isn't significiant. And some of your activities, enhanced by the nature of your reply, certainly beg questions of your understanding of this principle and the guidelines and policies beneath. -- Sabre (talk) 13:12, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Apology

The apology isn't necessary, I wasn't mad, I just wanted to make sure you new of the appropriate policies after a number of your comments seemed unknowing of them. I probably wrote a bit harshly, but I wanted to get your attention. In any case, you mentioned a StarCraft series article on the SC2 talk page. Rather conviently I've been working on one the last week or so, and its just reached a point where I can put it out. Its over at StarCraft (series). -- 17:39, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure how the Wikiproject stuff actually works, but I think its automatically a sub-project of the VG Wikiproject. I stuck up an icon in the top right a while back that designated it as such, and that put it into the appropriate categories. -- Sabre (talk) 10:52, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Silkroadkool.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Silkroadkool.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Thiefa.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Thiefa.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 04:27, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

File:Wpsclogo.gif listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Wpsclogo.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 19:28, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

MfD nomination of Wikipedia:WikiProject StarCraft/greetings

Wikipedia:WikiProject StarCraft/greetings, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject StarCraft/greetings and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Wikipedia:WikiProject StarCraft/greetings during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Izno (talk) 20:47, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:WikiProject StarCraft

Category:WikiProject StarCraft, which you created, has been nominated for discussion. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Izno (talk) 20:48, 1 February 2012 (UTC)